RenCen plan would demolish 2 towers — but it hinges on public money

[Airforceguy]

Two of the 39-story office towers — 300 and 400 — on the Detroit riverfront are slated for demolition, freeing up more land for public space along the water.

One of the remaining towers, the 100 tower, is slated for residential conversion into some 300-400 units; while the other 200 tower is expected to undergo an overhaul as spruced-up office space for new tenants, Kofi Bonner, CEO of Bedrock, said in an interview with Crain's. The 1,300-room Detroit Marriott at the Renaissance Center hotel tower, the state’s tallest building at 73 stories and 727 feet, would also be carved up; reducing the hotel to some 850 rooms on the lower levels and reserving the top levels for what Bonner described as high-end residential space.

The vision would create a new Wintergarden-like structure providing better riverfront access for the hotel for events, plus additional commercial space, a GM spokesperson said.

"We really wanted to open up the RenCen complex to the riverfront and provide a pathway to downtown, connected to downtown," Bonner said in an interview. "It's 5.5 million square feet, and it's 5.5 million square feet of two use types [[office and mall-like retail) that aren't as ... prominent in the marketplace as they were when these buildings were built."

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/real-e...gm-dan-gilbert

[Atticus]

RenCen plan would demolish 2 towers — but it hinges on public money




https://www.crainsdetroit.com/real-e...gm-dan-gilbert

Not a fan. This concept is like the 1990s/early2000s all over again. Only thing missing is some landscaped surface lots to go with it.

I was skeptical about the tear down idea to begin with, but the glaring hole in their argument is that they propose one of the remaining towers get a residential conversion. Well, if one of the four side towers can be converted to residential, then structurally they all could theoretically be converted to residential. So why then are tax dollars being used for demolition and not conversion?

The only reason not to convert all 3, or 4 if no office, side towers to residential is that Bedrock probably doesn’t want that large of a supply of residential on the market… ie supply vs demand. Obviously excess supply means lower rent prices. But if the argument is tax dollars should be used, I don’t see the ethical argument of reducing potential residential supply to increase rent costs. If tax dollars are used, it should be all conversion, no demolition.

[hybridy]

tear that schitt down

[Khahn]

Gilbert is committed to funding it to the tune of at least $1 billion, while GM would contribute $250 million and some $250 million or more in public funding

At least Gilbert and GM want to invest some serious money

[casscorridor]

Zero public funds should be given to this.

[K-slice]

Damn, too late in posting this in the current Ren Cen thread and preventing another splinter thread.

You guys know that we can just keep threads alive rather than creating a new thread for every single story Crain's runs, right?

[401don]

Was there ever a point where all of the Wintergarden spaces were occupied? I don't think so. Maybe half. Now it's all coming down. The parking structures on either side are pretty ugly, especially the one to the west. Not sure how much parking will be needed. Also not sure how many underground spaces there are.

[Danny]

Horrible! our Ren Cen would look like half of schitt! Save the 2 towers.

[Danny]

At least Gilbert and GM want to invest some serious money

Good he could put COSM there, too.

[mwilbert]

I was skeptical about the tear down idea to begin with, but the glaring hole in their argument is that they propose one of the remaining towers get a residential conversion. Well, if one of the four side towers can be converted to residential, then structurally they all could theoretically be converted to residential. So why then are tax dollars being used for demolition and not conversion?

The only reason not to convert all 3, or 4 if no office, side towers to residential is that Bedrock probably doesn’t want that large of a supply of residential on the market… ie supply vs demand. Obviously excess supply means lower rent prices. But if the argument is tax dollars should be used, I don’t see the ethical argument of reducing potential residential supply to increase rent costs. If tax dollars are used, it should be all conversion, no demolition.

There's an obvious reason, which is that demolition is almost certainly cheaper than conversion, and they, rightly I expect, believe there's only a finite pot of money for this project. I'm not saying there might not also be concerns about a large supply of new units, but I doubt that's the main issue. I expect a residential conversion to be quite expensive, and it's probably going to require some sizable subsidies.

I think it will be a challenge to get the resources to do this much. It may be possible, precisely because tearing down the whole thing would be a terrible signal to the world about Detroit that no one wants to send, but I can only imagine it's going to take a boatload of money.

[Rocket]

Scrap it.

It was a disaster from the start. Terribly complicated to find your way around.

I dreaded the few times I had to go in there for some reason.

Few are going to want to live in there, and that will not only limit occupancy, but also resale. Which in turn will limit the sales price of the units when new.

Knock it down and build something livable.

[mwilbert]

Scrap it.

It was a disaster from the start. Terribly complicated to find your way around.

I dreaded the few times I had to go in there for some reason.

Few are going to want to live in there, and that will not only limit occupancy, but also resale. Which in turn will limit the sales price of the units when new.

Knock it down and build something livable.

I think you are missing a piece of the plan, which is that they would eliminate the base. There's nothing inherently confusing about a residential tower.

I suspect a lot of people will want to live there; it's a great location with some very nice views. How many of those people will be able to afford to live there is the question. The rents, or sales prices, though I imagine probably rents, required to make the project viable aren't going to be low.

[Warrenite84]

I am not a fan of their proposal for low rise shed like structures along the river East of the Ren Cen. Stair stepped towers for future residential or business use would be a better use of space. Every inch of space need not be filled with throw away low density architecture.

The tower reduction and renovations require much more deliverable detail, not bait and switch pretty pictures but contractual delivery points. The Ilitch family made us wise to that scam.

Indeed, Mr. Gilbert has done great in the past with his other projects. Now, he could use a bit of refinement on his food hall plans on his Madison Ave. project.

[Jimaz]

Yea! Public money for public space.

That's like getting nothing for something!

Wait. What?

[Lowell]

What's up with those open air pavilions along the riverfront to the east?

It must be a good plan. Look at the swarms of people that are attracted to it. /sarcasm. And how about this for a starter, tear down that butt-ugly Miller parking lot that fronts the river to the west of RenCen. I notice it is missing in this picture but appears in the second picture above.

[royce]

We don't need more public space on the riverfront that's created by tearing down a building or two. We need surface parking lots turned into public space or residential buildings. In this plan I think the towers facing the river are the ones that should remain and the two facing Jefferson are the ones that should be torn down. Residential buildings should be as close to water as possible. Who desires to live on the waterfront two football fields away? Jefferson still needs to be open up to make this development more assessible. A one-way street with sidewalks could be created where Towers One and Two used to be and extend to and from Jefferson right up to towers three and four. This would also make vehicle and pedestrian access to the hotel a lot easier.

I personally would like to see all the towers remain. Mothball two towers and see if the market can handle more residential in the future. Again, I think the focus should be on saving Towers 3 and 4, not 1 and 2.

[13606Cedargrove]

[QUOTE=Rocket;645888]Scrap it.

It was a disaster from the start. Terribly complicated to find your way around.

I dreaded the few times I had to go in there for some reason.

Few are going to want to live in there, and that will not only limit occupancy, but also resale. Which in turn will limit the sales price of the units when new.

Knock it down and build something livable.[/QUOTE

Agreed. As I have stated in the past, based on personal day-to-day experience, the project is fundamentally flawed. I has been almost 50 years of trying to make it work when it clearly does not. It is time to move on with no public money involved in the demolition and re-development.

[Zads07]

It looks weird to me without the two towers at the riverfront. I do really like the idea of more public space along the river, though.

I'm intrigued by the buildings moving more east toward Belle Isle and what that will encompass.

Less parking lots, more buildings for people to use as living or retail.

I think this is a pretty good scenario given they're saving the other three towers.

I'd like to not tear them down and save it all, but I don't think that will happen.

[401don]

[QUOTE=13606Cedargrove;645896]

Scrap it.

It was a disaster from the start. Terribly complicated to find your way around.

I dreaded the few times I had to go in there for some reason.

Few are going to want to live in there, and that will not only limit occupancy, but also resale. Which in turn will limit the sales price of the units when new.

Knock it down and build something livable.[/QUOTE

Agreed. As I have stated in the past, based on personal day-to-day experience, the project is fundamentally flawed. I has been almost 50 years of trying to make it work when it clearly does not. It is time to move on with no public money involved in the demolition and re-development.

Again, as MWilbert said, they are basically building new by tearing down the base and having separate towers that you can walk right into. It will have zero resemblance to the current structure when it comes to navigating your way around.

[Genesyxx]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Asking for public money for a private equity swap/sale seems like having your hand out. They're gonna make their money back and then some when they start selling and raising lease costs. It still cuts off the city having the towers facing Jefferson, which has been a problem since its construction.

I would only keep the towers facing Beaubien, converting both to residential. Take your space from Marriott and covert that into office space and mixed use. Then you can make a walkable park & shopping experience along the Tunnel [[with maybe a welcome center) and it still has access to the riverfront.

Not a fan. This concept is like the 1990s/early2000s all over again. Only thing missing is some landscaped surface lots to go with it.

I was skeptical about the tear down idea to begin with, but the glaring hole in their argument is that they propose one of the remaining towers get a residential conversion. Well, if one of the four side towers can be converted to residential, then structurally they all could theoretically be converted to residential. So why then are tax dollars being used for demolition and not conversion?

The only reason not to convert all 3, or 4 if no office, side towers to residential is that Bedrock probably doesn’t want that large of a supply of residential on the market… ie supply vs demand. Obviously excess supply means lower rent prices. But if the argument is tax dollars should be used, I don’t see the ethical argument of reducing potential residential supply to increase rent costs. If tax dollars are used, it should be all conversion, no demolition.

[bpstrat]

I'm really disappointed in this proposal and shocked that they're seriously considering this. This really violates the aesthetic integrity of the building and makes it look lopsided and unbalanced. I'm also surprised by all of the support and excitement this is getting from the mayor, city council and Bedrock. I fail to see how butchering the most recognizable building in Detroit, and probably all of Michigan, sends a great message.

As a fan of 70s architecture [[one of the few, it seems), this has been a depressing few years in Metro Detroit. They recently demolished the Kmart headquarters in Troy and are planning to demolish Lakeside Mall in Sterling Heights. I know its hard to repurpose these buildings, but they said the same thing about Michigan Central Station, and look at all the excitement about the renovation there. In another 50 years people will probably wish some of these buildings from the 70s were still around. Why the rush to tear down more buildings? Haven't we done that enough here in Detroit. I feel like we keep erasing our history.

[EASTSIDER BALDUCK]

well said

[stasu1213]

Was there ever a point where all of the Wintergarden spaces were occupied? I don't think so. Maybe half. Now it's all coming down. The parking structures on either side are pretty ugly, especially the one to the west. Not sure how much parking will be needed. Also not sure how many underground spaces there are.

No. The most upper level had always been vacant. RenCen management had failed to fully utilize the Winter Garden

[stasu1213]

I'm really disappointed in this proposal and shocked that they're seriously considering this. This really violates the aesthetic integrity of the building and makes it look lopsided and unbalanced. I'm also surprised by all of the support and excitement this is getting from the mayor, city council and Bedrock. I fail to see how butchering the most recognizable building in Detroit, and probably all of Michigan, sends a great message.

As a fan of 70s architecture [[one of the few, it seems), this has been a depressing few years in Metro Detroit. They recently demolished the Kmart headquarters in Troy and are planning to demolish Lakeside Mall in Sterling Heights. I know its hard to repurpose these buildings, but they said the same thing about Michigan Central Station, and look at all the excitement about the renovation there. In another 50 years people will probably wish some of these buildings from the 70s were still around. Why the rush to tear down more buildings? Haven't we done that enough here in Detroit. I feel like we keep erasing our history.

It would look much more even if one tower is left on the river side and the other on Jefferson side. Not the two on the Jefferson side

[Henry Whalley]

Per the prophecies of Bongadamus, what remains will be the world's biggest bong, and at taxpayer expense.